Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Donald Trump is barred from Colorado's 2024 ballot, the state Supreme Court rules [View all]LetMyPeopleVote
(156,857 posts)6. BREAKING: by 4-3 vote, Colorado Supreme Court bars Trump from primary ballot
I trust Prof. Hasen and the Election Law blog
Link to tweet
https://electionlawblog.org/?p=140292
The Colorado Supreme Court, in a 4-3 decision, has issued its decision in Anderson v. Griswold, here. (Disclosure: I filed an amicus brief in support of neither party in the case.)
From the opinion:
(The trial court had concluded it had jurisdiction and that Trump engaged in insurrection under Section 3, but that he had not taken an oath that subjected him to Section 3 and that the office of the president was not among the offices barred under Section 3.)
This is a major and extraordinary holding from a state supreme court. Never in history has a presidential candidate been excluded from the ballot under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment. United States Supreme Court review seems inevitable, and it exerts major pressure on the Court. Even inaction would functional exclude him from not just Colorado but perhaps other states. And granting cert requires the Court to step into the thorniest of political thickets. There are a dozen ways the Court could go. And there is no question this is a big, big deal. State law requires the Secretary certify names by January 5, 2024, and while its possible to bump beyond that, practical ballot printing deadlines will quickly approach, and the holidays mean any review will be more truncated.
From the opinion:
In this appeal from a district court proceeding under the Colorado Election Code, the supreme court considers whether former President Donald J. Trump may appear on the Colorado Republican presidential primary ballot in 2024. A majority of the court holds that President Trump is disqualified from holding the office of President under Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Because he is disqualified, it would be a wrongful act under the Election Code for the Colorado Secretary of State to list him as a candidate on the presidential primary ballot. The court stays its ruling until January 4, 2024, subject to any further appellate proceedings.
(The trial court had concluded it had jurisdiction and that Trump engaged in insurrection under Section 3, but that he had not taken an oath that subjected him to Section 3 and that the office of the president was not among the offices barred under Section 3.)
This is a major and extraordinary holding from a state supreme court. Never in history has a presidential candidate been excluded from the ballot under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment. United States Supreme Court review seems inevitable, and it exerts major pressure on the Court. Even inaction would functional exclude him from not just Colorado but perhaps other states. And granting cert requires the Court to step into the thorniest of political thickets. There are a dozen ways the Court could go. And there is no question this is a big, big deal. State law requires the Secretary certify names by January 5, 2024, and while its possible to bump beyond that, practical ballot printing deadlines will quickly approach, and the holidays mean any review will be more truncated.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
5 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
136 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Donald Trump is barred from Colorado's 2024 ballot, the state Supreme Court rules [View all]
LetMyPeopleVote
Dec 2023
OP
The Colorado Supreme Court holds that Trump is disqualified from holding the presidency.
LetMyPeopleVote
Dec 2023
#2
A remarkably detailed and well reasoned decision. A tad tedious but well reasoned.
TomSlick
Dec 2023
#38
But what happens if other states join in? They are going to block all of them?
Maraya1969
Dec 2023
#93
Yeah, but the 14th doesn't require conviction; it just says "engaged in insurrection or rebellion"
William Seger
Dec 2023
#92
In George Washington's day, Trump would already have been taken out and executed.
Lonestarblue
Dec 2023
#114
BREAKING: by 4-3 vote, Colorado Supreme Court bars Trump from primary ballot
LetMyPeopleVote
Dec 2023
#6
After all the blowback for recent decisions, the Federalist Society Six must have stomach ulcers by now.
sop
Dec 2023
#111
Colorado Supreme Court rules Trump disqualified from holding presidency
LetMyPeopleVote
Dec 2023
#10
So proud of my state. NOW, plenty of others, BE SO BOLD as to follow suit!!!!
RobertDevereaux
Dec 2023
#11
Au contraire! The federalistsocieters-funded-by-the-kochs will agree with CO.
Justice matters.
Dec 2023
#101
His name won't appear on the ballot, but it can still be written in. {edited}
mahatmakanejeeves
Dec 2023
#25
Write-in votes for him won't be counted - stated explicitly in the opinion
Prairie Gates
Dec 2023
#70
Cue the whine fest on Faux state television tonight. I'd never know cuz I never watch the motherfuckers.
Comfortably_Numb
Dec 2023
#30
It's not necessary to be on the ballot for a state's primary to be on that state's general election ballot.
24601
Dec 2023
#121
Colorado Supreme Court kicks Trump off the state's 2024 ballot for violating the U.S. Constitution
LetMyPeopleVote
Dec 2023
#34
my bet is that SCOTUS will allow him on the ballot with a concurring majority of all kinds of opinions
prodigitalson
Dec 2023
#43
Without requiring a conviction by a jury, a judge's opinion can be based on anything.
Fiendish Thingy
Dec 2023
#74
Reality, due process and precedent say that a conviction *is* required.
Fiendish Thingy
Dec 2023
#84
So, your'e okay with a few witnesses testifying against you, then you're sentenced to prison?
SlimJimmy
Dec 2023
#133
SCOTUS?? Wait a minuite- What about hair on fire whirling maggots shrieking States Rights States Rights States Rights
NBachers
Dec 2023
#58